What would an Obama presidency bring?

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Published 4:00 am, Monday, March 3, 2008

Photo: Lance Iversen, The Chronicle

Image 1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

curlew

curlew

Photo: Lance Iversen, The Chronicle

What would an Obama presidency bring?

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

Editor - Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive. This was one of William F. Buckley's most perspicacious insights and neatly summarizes the many contradictions of Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama is the Democrats' Ronald Reagan. Like Reagan, Obama's idealism points directly to a deeper recession, higher national debt and a greater reliance on military adventures to prop up the economy.

His proposed fund to deal with the subprime lending crisis is a government bailout of the banking industry and property owners at taxpayer expense. It amounts to more national debt and a new burden on renters. It is reminiscent of the Reagan-Bush response to the 1980s savings-and-loan crisis.

His criticism of a lack of equipment and preparation in the "misguided war" in Iraq can only mean more defense spending on big-ticket corporate weaponry. His promise to unilaterally go after al Qaeda in other countries is reminiscent of the Iran-Contra affair.

His health care policy is market-based regulation of health care. Just as Reagan used deregulation to promote competition in banking, Obama will bring competition into health care as a way to lower costs. Health care industry competition will only lead to more victimization of those who can least afford health care. We'll lose more than just our homes. For Obama, morning in America will be a twilight zone.

PAUL PAGE

San Francisco

No office for old men

Editor - I'm starting to think I'll have to vote (absentee) for Sen. Barack Obama for president, if for no other reason than to irritate a ton of people who are forecasting disaster in the event. I have no doubt whatsoever that there is still a large number of people so unevolved as to believe that only old white men are entitled to hold the ultimate power of the chief-executive ship. I say Maalox to them all.

Dirty ships

Editor - Regarding: "State air board must get federal approval to limit ship emissions" (Feb. 28): The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that California can't protect its citizens from ocean-going vessel pollution without first getting federal approval. The Environmental Protection Agency's unlikely to grant such authorization. The EPA recently rejected California's landmark program to reduce greenhouse gas pollution from cars and trucks, demonstrating a negative view of state action.

The EPA has also made it clear that it is waiting for an international agreement on vessel pollution. In the meantime, up to 5,000 premature U.S. deaths per year are caused by these large, ocean-going vessels.

If the Bush administration won't act and California is legally prevented from doing so, Congress must step into the breach. Citizens across the country are suffering harmful effects from ship pollution. Congress should move forward with efforts to set stringent limits on marine vessel pollution by passing the Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act.

We're watching, senators

Editor - Because my experience tells me the chance of reaching at least one of our senators by mail is arguably small, I am hoping this letter might reinforce your editorial, "Fix the farm bill" (Feb. 29) to their attention and might encourage others to do the same. Any increase in taxes, needed to increase subsidies to corporate farms and wealthy landholders, not only makes little sense, it is unconscionable.

New math, old politics

In response to the question, "Why have you allowed out of control spending to continue?" the governor replied: "Let me just tell you the reality of it. For instance, (state Sen. Tom) McClintock runs around and says spending has gone up under my ad-ministration.

But what the governor forgets to tell us is that half the money we are spending is going to pay back the previous administration's debt. Remember, when I came into office, we had to pay back Proposition 42 (transportation funding), we had to pay back all kinds of local government, we had to pay back everywhere. And we had to prepay the economic recovery bonds that we had to pay off."

The governor is apparently pioneering a new form of mathematics in making this claim. According to his own Department of Finance, then-Gov. Gray Davis' combined deficit over five years totaled $4.1 billion. (Surpluses of $5.4 billion in 1999-00 and $3.1 billion in 2002-03 were offset by deficits of $6.6 billion in 2000-01, $4.5 billion in 2001-02 and $1.6 billion in 2003-04).

Davis's last general fund budget spent $78.3 billion. In August, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a general fund budget of $103 billion, an increase of $24.7 billion since he took office.

Perhaps it is this new branch of mathematics that led the governor to assure the public last August that his latest budget was not only balanced, but contained the biggest reserve in state history.

BART solution

Editor - Regarding "BART's budget off rails" (Feb. 29): I have the perfect solution to BART's approaching financial crisis: a 25 cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline in the Bay Area counties served by BART.

This tax represents less than 10 percent of the current price of gasoline in the Bay Area, about the same as the New Year's fare increases, and it would raise billions to improve and expand BART's services while increasing ridership at the same time. And gasoline would still cost less than it does in Europe.

Our tainted S.F. Bay

Editor - The story "Rain dumps more sewage in the Bay" (Feb. 27) underscores the dire situation for our shorebirds.

Even the casual observer can tell that the San Francisco Bay Area, and the wetlands in particular, are suffering.

Strolling by litter-strewn muddy embankments of pickleweed, you can watch wading birds skillfully probe the mud with their long bills and diving ducks plunge headfirst into the murky waters. They thrust their bills into the silt, sifting through it in search of the tiny invertebrates that comprise their diet. But in doing so, they ingest the toxins and sewage that have spilled forth, either accidentally or intentionally.

There is no question that exposure to raw sewage is hurting our wildlife. And to claim that the easily and frequently overwhelmed aging sewer system of the Bay Area is too difficult and expensive to replace is a travesty in one of the wealthiest states in the wealthiest country of the world.

ANGELIQUE CUCARO

Pacifica

Election on the cheap

Editor - There is a way to eliminate the millions of dollars being spent on elections. We don't even need public financing. Just let the media decide who should be president.